Which camera should I upgrade to?

N

naveen.nag

Messages
214
Name
Naveen
Edit My Images
No
Hi All, I currently own a canon 550D and I have been doing photography as a serious hobby for 5 years now. I just bought my dream lens which canon 70-200 2.8 L IS. I feel to make the most of the lens I need to upgrade the camera to full frame. So thinking of selling my existing kit and buy a full frame. I don't have too much cash to spend on (my budget is around 900 quid)

My question: which camera should I go for? 5D-2 or 6D? Which one is better among the two? What are the pros and cons of both? Correct me if I am wrong 7d is not a full frame, right? Why is that so popular?

Please advise!!

-Naveen
 
I have owned a 5Dii but found the basic AF very inferior to the 7D and 1Div I currently own. I also missed the crop factor at the long end of my lens. If you are taking lots of photos at 200mm you might also find this going to full frame. The 6D never interested me as a 2nd hand 5dii was cheaper and better in lots of ways bar high iso IMO

The 7D would be a great upgrade from the 550D, I went from a 500D to one and loved it as a massive jump up in every way.

With the 7D second hand price now so low it is a bargain at half the cost of a 6D.

If I was going back from my 1Div I would go 7D over a 5Dii.
 
I have owned a 7D and a 5D mkII and I have since sold them both. I now own a 6D. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the 6D is by far the better camera of the three. All the cameras are very good and have their strengths but for low light shooting, IQ and lack of noise the 6D IMHO is streets ahead of the other two.

The 7D scores highest on burst shutter speed and the number of AF points so is going to best the best for action shots and because of its crop factor for wildlife shots and it is of course the cheapest of the three options. I can see absolutely no argument for the 5D mark 2 over the 6D. The 6D is the more modern camera with better technology and if you look at comparison reviews wins in all the areas that count.

I believe you need to consider what your needs are - do you shoot a lot of action and wildlife then probably the 7D shades it. For all other photography and if money is not an issue it is a no brainer - the 6D.
 
I've got a 550d and have hankered after a better body for a while - you know the score, regular visits to Jessops 'for a look' just to hold the new cameras on the market like the 6d etc. Anyway, I can't help you decide but what I will say is the the feel and handling of the higher spec cameras is much different and they are heavier than the 550d so bear that in mind too - get yourself to a shop and try them out.
 
I agree what grumps states. If you are shooting sports or wildlife I'd suggest a 7d. If you are shooting portraits, low light or landscapes I'd suggest a 6d.

7d major benefits are:
- focus
- crop camera so your lenses in effect will have more reach

6d has benefits of
- image quality
- low light performance

I'd suggest the 6d over the 5d mark II
 
naveen.nag said:
I just bought my dream lens which canon 70-200 2.8 L IS. I feel to make the most of the lens I need to upgrade the camera to full frame.
Click to expand...
You might feel that way, but that doesn't make it true. Most lenses actually perform better on a crop sensor camera, because their optical quality is at its worst towards the corners of the full frame, but on a crop body you're not using those corners.

There are valid reasons for wanting to switch to a full frame camera, but I don't think this is one of them.

Incidentally you haven't said anything about what kind of photos you like to take, and in what way your current camera is falling short for you. Without some information here, it's hard to give meaningful advice.
 
Last edited:
My two pence worth. I have just upgraded from a 400D to a 70D, still a crop but I am very very pleased with it and you will still have £300 left over

S
 
Depends on budget and what you are shooting full frame portraits crop for sports imho unless you buy a 1dx which does everything
 
I'm not in the market but try to stay relatively current - could someone explain why you'd recommend a mk. 1 7D over a 70D, please? Doesn't the 70D have the focussing system of the 7D with enhanced low-light capability?
 
Thanks everyone.

Grumps/Chris/Mike:
I mostly do landscapes and night photography. Hardly ever used the other end of the lens since I hardly do any wild life or bird photography or sports Hence its titling towards 6D. I am looking for image quality, super sharpness, and good performance in low light.
 
naveen.nag said:
Thanks everyone.

Grumps/Chris/Mike:
I mostly do landscapes and night photography. Hardly ever used the other end of the lens since I hardly do any wild life or bird photography or sports Hence its titling towards 6D. I am looking for image quality, super sharpness, and good performance in low light.
Click to expand...

From what you say above, I'd definitely recommend the 6d then
 
naveen.nag said:
Thanks everyone.

Grumps/Chris/Mike:
I mostly do landscapes and night photography. Hardly ever used the other end of the lens since I hardly do any wild life or bird photography or sports Hence its titling towards 6D. I am looking for image quality, super sharpness, and good performance in low light.
Click to expand...


Those qualities sum up the 6D (subject to the lens of course).
 
PINNACLE said:
I have owned a 5Dii but found the basic AF very inferior to the 7D and 1Div I currently own. I also missed the crop factor at the long end of my lens. If you are taking lots of photos at 200mm you might also find this going to full frame. The 6D never interested me as a 2nd hand 5dii was cheaper and better in lots of ways bar high iso IMO

The 7D would be a great upgrade from the 550D, I went from a 500D to one and loved it as a massive jump up in every way.

With the 7D second hand price now so low it is a bargain at half the cost of a 6D.

If I was going back from my 1Div I would go 7D over a 5Dii.
Click to expand...
In what way is the 5d2 better than the 6d?

The 6d has better IQ, better focusing, a far more sensitive centre AF point for low light (-3 ev!), better buffer, shoots better video, has wi fi (great for remote shooting) and GPS if you want that, better dynamic range, better high ISO, a faster processor, faster FPS....

There's more but you get the idea!
 
Last edited:
The 6D, definitely. My wife uses one and it compares very favourably to my 5D3 in image quality; my only gripes would be the cheap-feeling control pad (hers has actually come loose after a year) and the tightly-nested AF points - oh, and the lower fastest shutter speed - but for your landscape and night photography work those won't be issues!
 
Depends what you shoot I have just upgraded from a 550d to a 7d mk2. What a difference
 
StewartR said:
You might feel that way, but that doesn't make it true. Most lenses actually perform better on a crop sensor camera, because their optical quality is at its worst towards the corners of the full frame, but on a crop body you're not using those corners... <snip>
Click to expand...

Not really. The same lens, at the same aperture and focal length will always perform worse on APS-C than FF, in the centre. Because it's being asked to deliver 1.5x or 1.6x more resolution, with the inevitable consequence that contrast is reduced - and sharpness with it (basic lens MTF theory). At the edges of APS-C it can be a different story, depending on how much sharpness drops off across the frame, but in the main they are also less sharp than FF.

Lens MTF is the main reason why sharpness is better on larger formats.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
Not really. The same lens, at the same aperture and focal length will always perform worse on APS-C than FF, in the centre. Because it's being asked to deliver 1.5x or 1.6x more resolution, with the inevitable consequence that contrast is reduced - and sharpness with it (basic lens MTF theory). At the edges of APS-C it can be a different story, depending on how much sharpness drops off across the frame, but in the main they are also less sharp than FF.

Lens MTF is the main reason why sharpness is better on larger formats.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but no, but...

Who says the lens is being asked to deliver 1.5x or 1.6x more resolution? Surely that's making an assumption about pixel counts. What you meant, surely, was that the same lens, at the same aperture and focal length will always perform worse on a high-pixel-density sensor than on a low-pixel-density sensor.
 
StewartR said:
Yeah, but no, but...

Who says the lens is being asked to deliver 1.5x or 1.6x more resolution? Surely that's making an assumption about pixel counts. What you meant, surely, was that the same lens, at the same aperture and focal length will always perform worse on a high-pixel-density sensor than on a low-pixel-density sensor.
Click to expand...

The 1.5x or 1.6x extra resolution is the APS-C crop factor, or in real numbers, if a FF lens produces say 80% MTF at 24 lines-per-mm, then to deliver the same standard of sharpness on APS-C it has to produce the same % MTF at 36-38 lines-per-mm, and that is physically impossible - FF will always be sharper. The difference (in my Imatest MTFs) varies a bit, between maybe 8-12% MTF, which is very noticeable. The best quality lenses deliver the least difference between formats.

It has nothing to do with pixel counts or pixel density, within reason. It's the basic fact of physics that as resolution goes up, so image contrast must go down. And it's contrast that plays the bigger role in our perception of sharpness.
 
lightshipman said:
At this moment in time, not sure 6 months down the line!!!!!
Click to expand...

Well I went from a D5100 but to the D7000 and agree there is a learning curve. Sadly my D7000 has the focussing issues I had read about and I thought 'not me' but it was to be me as confirmed by the repair place - under warranty though thank goodness as it is £160 for the repair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top